Alabama Senate passes watered down carry reform bill. SB-286

ADobbs1989 said:

A few people from Bama Carry were there and their overall response to the hearing was positive. They seem to get the vibe that the bill was pass committee which will be voted on tomorrow. Another member of Bama Carry had a run in with the governor while out shopping the other day and his response was that as soon as it passes the House he will be signing it into law.

Click to expand...

Thanks, ADobbs. Please keep me posted on this. The media are always ready to let us know when a state passes stricter gun control laws, but not when it eases existing laws.

herman48 said:

Thanks, ADobbs. Please keep me posted on this. The media are always ready to let us know when a state passes stricter gun control laws, but not when it eases existing laws.

Click to expand...

Right now the ASA and ABC are still spouting lies and delaying the process by trying to bring "compromise bills" even though this bill is ALREADY a compromise bill that the ASA and ABC both had input on. Very disappointed in our sheriffs, they all need to be replaced next year.

That's the problem when you compromise your principles. It's never enough for the unprincipled!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

This is what I just got from the NRA-ILA (emphasis mine):




"Alabama: NRA-Supported Omnibus Firearms Bill Passes House Committee
Contact your state Representative TODAY to support Senate Bill 286

Today, the Alabama House Commerce and Small Business Committee passed Senate Bill 286 by a 6 to 2 vote. SB 286 was championed by state Senators Scott Beason (R-17) and Roger Bedford (D-6). State Representative Ed Henry (R-9) offered a substitute for Senate Bill 286 in committee, and this will be the bill that will come to the floor of the Alabama House of Representatives. While SB 286 has not yet been scheduled for consideration on the state House floor, please contact your state Representative in support of SB 286. Contact information for your state Representative can be found here.

While not perfect, the language that was substituted in Senate Bill 286 will continue to restore and protect the rights of law-abiding gun owners and sportsmen in Alabama by reforming the state gun laws in the following ways:

Allows those who possess a valid Alabama pistol permit to keep firearms stored in their vehicle while at work, as well as allowing those who possess a valid Alabama hunting license to store an unloaded rifle or shotgun in their vehicle while at work.
Allows for the transportation of a handgun without an Alabama pistol permit as long as the handgun is unloaded, locked in a container and out of reach of the driver or passenger.
Shifts the current “May Issue” concealed carry permit system to a “Shall Issue” permit system and requires that a sheriff must issue or deny the carry permit within thirty days. Should someone be denied a permit, a written denial must be provided and that applicant would have an opportunity to appeal the denial.
A permit to carry a concealed pistol shall be good for one to five years (to be decided by the applicant seeking the carry permit).
Requires sheriffs to use the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) to conduct a background check on concealed pistol permit applicants.
Allows for all other valid state-issued permits to carry a concealed firearm to be recognized in Alabama.
Strengthens Alabama’s firearms preemption statute by reserving for the state legislature complete control over regulation and policy relating to firearms, ammunition and firearm accessories in order to ensure that such regulation is applied uniformly throughout the state.
Extends the current Castle Doctrine to include places of business to ensure the right of self-defense does not end when you enter your business."

It keeps getting worse.

FTG-05 said:

...It keeps getting worse.

Click to expand...

Does this surprise you? Next year, I suggest that you tackle one or two issues at a time, rather than going for an omnibus bill. The top three priorities should be: Unlicensed carry in a car. Flat-out repeal of -52 (not a rewrite). Repeal of no-carry at demonstrations.

If that is accomplished, "shall issue" becomes far less important.

Fix the Right. Then work on the privilege.

Just some friendly advice. It's your State now, not mine.

If we can rally an effort to get the House to strike out the prohibited places, and strike out -52 I will be satisfied with the bill. As it is written I will urge the reps to either amend the bill as I have stated or vote the bill down. I'm all for compromises and small steps in the right directions, but I will not support any blatant disregard for our rights.

As I said before, support this bill as it is now, and work with the legislators to make it better next year. It may not be exactly what you want, but it's better than the status quo. The foot in the door, folks, the foot in the door... Haven't you learned anything from the gun control crowd? It's a lot easier to steal the salami one slice at a time than to grab the whole thing and run.

herman48 said:

As I said before, support this bill as it is now, and work with the legislators to make it better next year. It may not be exactly what you want, but it's better than the status quo. The foot in the door, folks, the foot in the door... Haven't you learned anything from the gun control crowd? It's a lot easier to steal the salami one slice at a time than to grab the whole thing and run.

Click to expand...

I was fine with that before, but if you read the "compromise" bill that was introduced by the ASA and passed by the house committee gun owners would lose more rights than we gain. We are currently better off right now than we would be if the bill passed as written. I'm fine with compromises as long as it's still going in the right direction, but right now we are moving 1 step forward and two steps back, unless the reps can amend the bill back to pro-gun rights then it's better to be killed and come back next year with something different and try again.

ADobbs1989 said:

I was fine with that before, but if you read the "compromise" bill that was introduced by the ASA and passed by the house committee gun owners would lose more rights than we gain. We are currently better off right now than we would be if the bill passed as written. I'm fine with compromises as long as it's still going in the right direction, but right now we are moving 1 step forward and two steps back, unless the reps can amend the bill back to pro-gun rights then it's better to be killed and come back next year with something different and try again.

Click to expand...

I may not be as familiar with the existing Alabama laws as you are, ADobbs, but what I read in the following NRA release doesn't look too shabby as a restoration of gun rights in Alabama. Besides, if there are steps backwards, as you say, they can be corrected in the next legislatures. Here's what the NRA writes:

Contact your state Representative TODAY to support Senate Bill 286

Today, the Alabama House Commerce and Small Business Committee passed Senate Bill 286 by a 6 to 2 vote. SB 286 was championed by state Senators Scott Beason (R-17) and Roger Bedford (D-6). State Representative Ed Henry (R-9) offered a substitute for Senate Bill 286 in committee, and this will be the bill that will come to the floor of the Alabama House of Representatives. While SB 286 has not yet been scheduled for consideration on the state House floor, please contact your state Representative in support of SB 286. Contact information for your state Representative can be found here.

While not perfect, the language that was substituted in Senate Bill 286 will continue to restore and protect the rights of law-abiding gun owners and sportsmen in Alabama by reforming the state gun laws in the following ways:
•Allows those who possess a valid Alabama pistol permit to keep firearms stored in their vehicle while at work, as well as allowing those who possess a valid Alabama hunting license to store an unloaded rifle or shotgun in their vehicle while at work.
•Allows for the transportation of a handgun without an Alabama pistol permit as long as the handgun is unloaded, locked in a container and out of reach of the driver or passenger.
•Shifts the current “May Issue” concealed carry permit system to a “Shall Issue” permit system and requires that a sheriff must issue or deny the carry permit within thirty days. Should someone be denied a permit, a written denial must be provided and that applicant would have an opportunity to appeal the denial.
•A permit to carry a concealed pistol shall be good for one to five years (to be decided by the applicant seeking the carry permit).
•Requires sheriffs to use the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) to conduct a background check on concealed pistol permit applicants.
•Allows for all other valid state-issued permits to carry a concealed firearm to be recognized in Alabama.
•Strengthens Alabama’s firearms preemption statute by reserving for the state legislature complete control over regulation and policy relating to firearms, ammunition and firearm accessories in order to ensure that such regulation is applied uniformly throughout the state.
•Extends the current Castle Doctrine to include places of business to ensure the right of self-defense does not end when you enter your business.

herman48 said:

I may not be as familiar with the existing Alabama laws as you are, ADobbs, but what I read in the following NRA release doesn't look too shabby as a restoration of gun rights in Alabama. Besides, if there are steps backwards, as you say, they can be corrected in the next legislatures. Here's what the NRA writes:

Contact your state Representative TODAY to support Senate Bill 286

Today, the Alabama House Commerce and Small Business Committee passed Senate Bill 286 by a 6 to 2 vote. SB 286 was championed by state Senators Scott Beason (R-17) and Roger Bedford (D-6). State Representative Ed Henry (R-9) offered a substitute for Senate Bill 286 in committee, and this will be the bill that will come to the floor of the Alabama House of Representatives. While SB 286 has not yet been scheduled for consideration on the state House floor, please contact your state Representative in support of SB 286. Contact information for your state Representative can be found here.

While not perfect, the language that was substituted in Senate Bill 286 will continue to restore and protect the rights of law-abiding gun owners and sportsmen in Alabama by reforming the state gun laws in the following ways:
•Allows those who possess a valid Alabama pistol permit to keep firearms stored in their vehicle while at work, as well as allowing those who possess a valid Alabama hunting license to store an unloaded rifle or shotgun in their vehicle while at work.

GREAT

•Allows for the transportation of a handgun without an Alabama pistol permit as long as the handgun is unloaded, locked in a container and out of reach of the driver or passenger.

HOW USELESS

•Shifts the current “May Issue” concealed carry permit system to a “Shall Issue” permit system and requires that a sheriff must issue or deny the carry permit within thirty days. Should someone be denied a permit, a written denial must be provided and that applicant would have an opportunity to appeal the denial.

GREAT

•A permit to carry a concealed pistol shall be good for one to five years (to be decided by the applicant seeking the carry permit).

WHO CARES? THE CURRENT COMPROMISE ALLOWS THE SHERIFFS TO CHARGE WHATEVER THEY WANT AND IF YOU GET IT FOR 5 YEARS IT WILL COST 5X MORE. THE POINT OF THIS SECTION TO BEGIN WITH WAS TO ALLOW DISCOUNTS TO PEOPLE WHO PURCHASED THE PERMIT FOR MULTIPLE YEARS

•Requires sheriffs to use the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) to conduct a background check on concealed pistol permit applicants.

DON'T SEE HOW THIS IS PRO-GUN RIGHTS, I PERSONALLY DON'T CARE WHAT SYSTEM THEY USE AND WOULD PREFER THEY DIDN'T USE ANY SYSTEMS

•Allows for all other valid state-issued permits to carry a concealed firearm to be recognized in Alabama.

DOESN'T HELP ME ANY

•Strengthens Alabama’s firearms preemption statute by reserving for the state legislature complete control over regulation and policy relating to firearms, ammunition and firearm accessories in order to ensure that such regulation is applied uniformly throughout the state.

WE ALREADY HAVE THIS, AND FRANKLY IT'S BS BECAUSE OUR CONSTITUTION ALREADY SAYS THAT WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS AND THE POWER TO INFRINGE ON THIS RIGHT IS EXEMPTED OUT OF THE POWERS OF THE GOVERNMENT

•Extends the current Castle Doctrine to include places of business to ensure the right of self-defense does not end when you enter your business.

I WAS UNAWARE THIS WASN'T ALREADY IN PRACTICE, HAVEN'T HEARD OF ANY ALABAMIAN STORE OWNERS BEING CHARGED FOR PROTECTING THEMSELVES AND OTHERS DURING AN ATTACK

Click to expand...

Added my own wording to your quoted post, this shall not be construed to mean I'm putting words in your mouth. This bill was NOT a NRA bill, it was written largely by members of Bama Carry. The NRA has now taken over the bill and added in the compromises with the sheriffs. The NRA has a strong track record of compromising our rights away, they are only on board because of Shall issue, and employee carry. They couldn't care less about our individual rights. Along with the few "good" things in the bill they have also done the following. Left in -52, which will continue to be used to harass gun owners. They added in a part about LEO's can keep the peace or protect public safety, which could easily be used to arrest OC'ers for "causing public alarm". There is also a plethora of "prohibited places" where we lose our right to carry, places we currently can legally carry, and attached is a "catch all" phrase where any public building can post a guard, detectors, or turnstiles and effectively prohibit people from carrying there. There are too many things to fix, and frankly I don't want to bet that we can fix these things next year. It's much harder to remove law than it is to enact law, once these things become law it's not going to be a cakewalk to have them removed. Just look at -52, ITS NOT EVEN A LAW! It has no penalty, nor does it state what type of offense it is so therefore it is not a law, and we can't even get that removed. But you think it's smart to allow all these other rights to be taken away in the hopes we can fix them later? Doubtful.

Actually, when a bill has passed, it's easier to make it better--as long as the legislators and the governor are still pro-gun (this may change, in which case they could make it worse). In Alaska, when the original bill passed you could not carry concealed in restaurants where alcohol was being served (regardless of whether you were consuming it or not), nor could you carry in banks. These restrictions were repealed in successive legislative sessions, together with others that I can't think of right now. Finally the legislature, after it became obvious that the "Far West" and the bloodbaths forecast by the media before the passage of the original bill did not come to pass, did completely away with the ccw. You can carry concealed w/o a permit, and the only reason people still get ccw's is the reciprocity with other states.

herman48 said:

Actually, when a bill has passed, it's easier to make it better--as long as the legislators and the governor are still pro-gun (this may change, in which case they could make it worse). In Alaska, when the original bill passed you could not carry concealed in restaurants where alcohol was being served (regardless of whether you were consuming it or not), nor could you carry in banks. These restrictions were repealed in successive legislative sessions, together with others that I can't think of right now. Finally the legislature, after it became obvious that the "Far West" and the bloodbaths forecast by the media before the passage of the original bill did not come to pass, did completely away with the ccw. You can carry concealed w/o a permit, and the only reason people still get ccw's is the reciprocity with other states.

Click to expand...

Might depend on the pro-gun'ness of the legislature. We had minimal support when the bill originally was submitted, it wasn't until after the first amendment process when we gained support of the senate. We have very few in state senators/reps who are outspokenly pro-gun to the point they are willing to push bills. Which is really weird since it's Alabama. I personally would be worried about the fate of the bad parts with our current congress. I see lackadaisical support for removing the prohibited places and other vague language. I could be wrong and this bill could open the door to furthering Alabama's gun rights, or I could be right and this bill might set us back on gun rights for quite some time. I'm not sure if it's worth it to risk or not, difficult situation.

The bill entrenches the State-issued permission slip.

The fix is to allow carry without the permission slip. (1) Repeal -52, so no one thinks it makes OC with or without a license illegal. (2) Allow carry in a car without a license. (3) Remove the prohibition for carry at a demonstration. Those three things are all you really need.

Then fix the permission slip system (if you think you still need it).

I would add (4), but it is a federal infringement (and likely to be ruled unconstitutional once someone decides to risk challenging it): Repeal the GFSZ.

Fix those things and the permission slip becomes irrelevant.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

I don't want to put down anyone who feels strongly about open carry, but as far as I am concerned I would not feel comfortable carrying a handgun in plain sight.

Then I must wonder why you post here. This site exists for the sole purpose of promoting Open Carry.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

Good question...

eye95 said:

Then I must wonder why you post here. This site exists for the sole purpose of promoting Open Carry.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

Click to expand...

I have nothing against open carry, but while recognizing the right others have to carry openly, and being quite willing to promote this right, I myself would feel conspicuous and awkward toting my hogleg visible on my hip. As to why I joined this forum, I was cruising the Internet looking for information on the Alabama omnibus bill, and this thread popped up. As far as I am concerned, there shouldn't be any need for permits or licenses to carry concealed, openly, in the car, on public transportation (airplanes included), in public buildings, in private homes, etc.--the way there is no need for licenses or permits to exercise our other rights recognized and protected by the Bill of Rights. But I am also familiar enough with the political process to understand that you can't obtain immediately all you want, and that at times one needs to compromise to obtain something. And something is always much better than nothing. I insist, at the cost of being boring, that this omnibus bill, though far from perfect, is a step in the right direction. Its positives outnumber its negatives. And once this bill has been passed (and it will be, from what I hear and read) it will be easier to change it for the better, especially once the bloodbaths that the sheriffs and the media have predicted will not follow the change from "may issue" to "shall issue" and the other positive changes that this bill ensures. And even the enemies of Open Carry will have the wind taken out of their sails once the anti-gunners have been proven wrong once more.
As to why I myself would not carry openly--besides feeling awkward--allow me to explain some other logical reasons: 1. I feel that when many people carry concealed, as in Florida, for example, criminals are more afraid to attack civilians, not knowing whether they are armed or not. Uncertainty is a deterrent. 2. If open carry is the norm, then criminals may assume that those who do not carry openly are not carrying concealed, either, and are a soft target. This may increase attacks on unarmed people. 3. Not all of us are Wyatt Earp or Bat Masterson and none of us have eyes on the back of our head. Guns are a priority target for criminals and terrorists. A nice bop on the head while you are walking in the street or pecking away at the keyboard at an Internet café, and the gun changes hands, hopefully without first having saluted its previous owner with a slug in the back. 4. There are real baddies out there, and they often go around in packs. Imagine some average fellow with a gun on his hip surrounded by a dozen thugs armed both with guns and knives rip-snorting to prove their manhood and show the guy that the gun does not make him ten feet tall. He may be brave enough to shoot one or two, but he's going to get killed anyway, and not in a pretty way.
These are some of the reasons that make ME prefer to carry concealed, without attracting trouble or scaring some sheeple who automatically assume that "gun equals bad guy." Then if others want to carry on their hip, in their hand, or any other visible way, it's still a free country, but not if Obama can help it. And if Obama is followed by Hillary or Biden, or Bloomberg, or Christie, then concealed or open will be just a moot point--we won't be able to carry anything else but our heads down in shame.
Peace, brother--I'm on your side!

Well,,,

What a piece of shlt Post,,,, and you made it twice, in two different threads!!!
You know nothing!!! you have no knowedge...
You are without... anything!
You should get learning,
Training,
Information,
smarts!!

herman48, thank you for your explanation. I disagree with it in large part, however the reaction to your post in the one below it is wholly uncalled for.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

1245A Defender said:

What a piece of shlt Post,,,, and you made it twice, in two different threads!!!
You know nothing!!! you have no knowedge...
You are without... anything!
You should get learning,
Training,
Information,
smarts!!

Click to expand...

If it is me you're addressing, I may not have "knowedge" (sic), training, or information, or smarts, but at least I have good manners.

eye95 said:

herman48, thank you for your explanation. I disagree with it in large part, however the reaction to your post in the one below it is wholly uncalled for.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

Click to expand...

It's OK to disagree. If we agreed all the time with one another it would be a very boring forum. Don't worry about the uncouth post. There are people like that in every forum. They don't even need a
gun to feel ten feet tall--anonymity and a computer keyboard are sufficient. But they do not generally detract from the overall quality of a forum.